johndyer@nuclearcrimes.com

Mr. Xxx (9 off)

Thornton Research Centre

Shell Research Limited

PO Box 1 Chester CH1 3SH.

14 April 2001

Dear Mr. , 

You are no doubt aware of my allegations concerning reactor/wholesale nuclear dumpings, at Shell’s Thornton Research Centre circa 1968. 

To recap; in 1993 my research findings resulted in the commission of a television programme for Carlton Communications.  Shortly before the proposed transmission date, 10 February 1994, Shell constructed and forwarded the Group's extensive (2900 word) Narrative to set-out its official position, and thereby explain away my allegations.  Briefly, Shell's Narrative was to the effect (that) - 'yes a cobalt 60 (labyrinth) nuclear building had been demolished, however, it was a comparatively 'harmless' nuclear building'- it was not, Shell claimed, the nuclear reactor/testing cell I had alleged.  In short, I had got it all wrong. 

The said Narrative ran for several thousand words, detailing, for instance, the radiation levels that were allegedly 'recorded' at the Cobalt-60's demolition – the counterfeit Co-60 demolition radiation recordings were included in Shell’s said Narrative to give the impression that the reactor decommissioning personnel had mistakenly identified the wrong ‘building’!  Faced with an imminent television programme, Shell aware of the truth, constructed its sham fraudulent Narrative to kill the programme and cover-up its nuclear dumping crimes. 

The events surrounding the actual reactor decommissioning (nothing whatsoever to do with the Co-60 demolition, as Shell are perfectly well aware) are somewhat complex, suffice to say, I detail page by page, line by line, the magnitude of the lies contained in Shell's Narrative of the 7 February 1994 (see www.nuclearcrimes.com). 

By 1998, my research findings were such, that Shell's ‘Cobalt-60 position’ became untenable.  Consequently, the Group's legal head (Richard Max Wiseman), was wheeled out to 'inform' that Shell’s Narrative Cobalt-60 claims/position was ‘an honest mistake’.  The Group's legal head explained that Shell had (wrongly) ‘assumed' that the 'building' that had been decommissioned, at Thornton Research Centre in 1968, was the Cobalt-60 labyrinth.  Furthermore, the legal head continued, when Carlton failed to write back to correct them, Shell assumed it must have correctly identified the building in question.  I was told this with an apparent straight face.  Shell’s inability to sustain its ‘honest mistake’ position (see my (enclosed) letter to Joanne Chandler 17/2/01 -page 6) has resulted in it shamelessly reverting to its Cobalt-60 position/lie as it attempts to brazen out its crimes.   

The enclosed 'first' document is a copy of Shell's (widely distributed) present line.  The enclosed example was 'penned' by Joanne Chandler (20 years plus with Shell).  You will see, by her reply (20/2/01), that Ms Chandler, along with other senior Shell personnel, doesn't believe a word of the lies she is sending out to all and sundry.  Ms Chandler's outright refusal to defend Shell’s position, never mind sign the requested Statement of Truth -that Royal Dutch/Shell did not have/house a nuclear reactor; that the Group did not employ known criminals, pay them a six figure CASH sum (at to-days prices) to decommission its secret reactor and dump the resulting waste, as per official Shell line - only mirrors Richard Wiseman (Shell's Legal Head), Mark Moody-Stuart's, and D J Freeman's (Shell’s lawyers) outright refusals to forward/sign a Statement of Truth in support of Shell official position. 

As you will plainly see from the enclosed correspondence, lie had to be piled upon lie, as the Group’s heads attempted to maintain an outward appearance of credibility.  Such is the present scale of the fabrications, that the Group is now apparently unable to substantiate a single point of its official position.  One recalls Lloyd George’s famous indiscretion, when the ‘Little Wizard’ was reported as saying, ‘I am not prepared to commit myself just yet in regard to my future destiny.  I may go to the Right, or I may drift to the Left.  My decision will be dependant on circumstances.  In the meantime, I must wait until I can discern were the land lies.’  This is not, I believe, an unfair summary of the self-serving cynicism, and disregard for the victims of its crimes displayed by the director’s of Royal Dutch/Shell.

Perhaps Thornton’s present head, Mr. Graeme Sweeney will now be willing to demonstrate his ‘faith’ in Shell’s present(?) position, by forwarding a Statement of Truth in its support?   However, I can predict with absolute certainty, that no such Statement of Truth (as set-out) will be forthcoming.  For the record, I have voluntarily forwarded a Statement of Truth, as I am telling the truth, I would be only too willing to repeat the process. 

A point of clarification may be of assistance regarding the background to my offer (page 7 of my (enclosed) letter to Joanne Chandler of the 17/2/0): 

 '.. to hand over direct to Shell, a transcript of my interview with your former 'Manager', complete with official, Shell and other documents conclusively 'demonstrating' that Shell Thornton Research Centre and its employees were conducting the nuclear research programs as per the Managers account.  I have further good news.  I have located some of the personnel involved.  However, not all reside in the UK, some reside in Europe, others are wider a field'.

The said transcript, I had previously informed Royal Dutch/Shell, would/will detail Shell’s (secret) nuclear reactor, and its subsequent decommissioning in 1968.  You may now wish to contemplate as to what possible reason Royal Dutch/Shell could have, if it actually believed a word its official ‘no reactor’ line, for rejecting this particular example of my numerous offer(s) to hand over my ‘evidence’ to Shell?

Should you have any questions, wish to communicate, and/or send any documents/items, please write directly to me at the above address, failing that just send a blank (or otherwise), e-mail.  I guarantee that under no circumstances whatsoever will I disclose your name and/or such communication.  Alternatively, see www.nuclearcrimes.com.  In any event, please photocopy the enclosed ‘documentation’ and distribute to Shell/Thornton/Stanlow and other personnel.  For, I hardly need to remind you, it is you, your fellow workers, your family, friends and communities that have been and continue to be, most exposed to Shell's nuclear dumpings and hence, victims of the Group’s crimes and subsequent cover-up.

Finally, you will see from my (enclosed) letter to Mr Sweeney, of the 27/3/01, that I have requested that he attends, address if he wishes, a proposed forthcoming Ellesmere Port & Neston BC Environment Committee meeting.  Should he attend, I would welcome any cross-examination by Mr Sweeney, and/or any other official Shell representative/lawyer(s).  This would give Shell employees the opportunity to also attend the proposed meeting, and see the ‘results’ for themselves.  For instance I shall be producing Shell correspondence, by which the Group legal head rejects my offer to call in the Health & Safety.  Consequently, I shall be requesting Mr. Sweeney retract the lie- that I had refused ‘Shell’s offer’ to call in the H & S-despite the fact I have written to Shell and their lawyers requesting that Thornton/Mr Sweeney stops the ‘misinformation’.   

Yours sincerely,

John Dyer.